Post-US Coast Guard Industry Day - Feedback Request.pdf

Post-US Coast Guard Industry Day: Feedback Request

In an effort to foster continued collaboration and gather valuable insights, we would appreciate your input on the following questions:

1. USCG is considering the best path for cranes, which is a significant interface on Pier 2 and Pier 3. The Government is interested in feedback as to whether it would offer efficiencies and cost savings for the DB contractor to procure and install the pier 2 and pier 3 cranes or if the government should procure and provide as a Government Furnished Equipment (GFE).

2. The Government is interested in understanding what a reasonable performance period is. Government desired completion of the waterfront optimization scope elements is 2030. What flexibilities does the government need to provide to facilitate the shortest amount of down time and/or disruption for CG to maintain industrial operations?

3. Based upon the layouts of the site provided, what space would be necessary for laydown areas? What flexibilities does the government need to consider to allow the contractor methods to reduce laydown area considering space considerations?

4. There is a requirement to dredge the channel to an appropriate depth to accommodate the new cutters. This requirement will be completed via a separate Design- Bid-Build contract. There is a requirement to dredge around the piers to accommodate the cutters. The government is considering whether to include this dredge requirement in the overall dredging contract to bring the channel to the appropriate depth, or whether to include the dredging around the piers as a component of the larger design-build waterfront revitalization project.

a. Would you recommend including the dredging around the piers be included in the design-build contract? If so, why? If not, why not?

b. If the government choses to include the dredging around the pier in the larger dredge contract, what risks does the government need to consider?

c. Please provide any feedback on how the berth area dredging might affect the waterfront optimization work.

5. The design-build construction project will require a project labor agreement unless an exception applies. What impacts to labor and cost should the government consider with a project labor agreement included in the contract?

6. The government is leaning toward using a design-build to budget approach utilizing some of the new flexibilities included in the FAR under the recent FAR overhaul to include selection of the highly qualified rated offeror. Please provide your option on procurement methods. Are there other innovative approaches the government should consider that would balance cost risk between the contractor and government and maximize scope?

7. What would be recommendation for a stipend amount for unsuccessful Phase 2 offerors based on what you know today?

Your responses to these questions will be instrumental in shaping future initiatives and ensuring that we are effectively addressing the needs of our industry partners.

Furthermore, we are committed to continuously improving the Industry Day experience.

Therefore, we welcome any feedback you may have regarding the registration process, scheduling of one-on-one meetings, presentation content, or any other aspect of the event. Your candid feedback will help us refine our approach and enhance future events.

Please submit your responses and any feedback to CENAB-Contracting@usace.army.mil, samuel.p.vido@usace.army.mil, and tamara.c.bonomlo@usace.army.mil by COB, Friday

31 OCT 2025.